BA 777 crash at heathrow , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 02:06 PM by Harlequin
reply to post by apex



www.youtube.com...

thats what happens with an engine bird strike



reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 03:19 PM by apex
I was thinking more like this, but even so, it shouldn't cause total loss of power, and the chances of simultaneous bird strikes on two engines must be pretty low.


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 03:24 PM by stumason
reply to post by apex



Even if birds hit both engines simultaneously, that shouldn't result in loss of electrical power to the aircraft as described by the pilot.

The pilot said he had a "total loss of power", which is lucky he was in a Boeing seeing as they don't use fly by wire for their avionics (I am led to believe), whereas an Airbus would have been almost impossible to control without power given it's avionics are FBW.


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 03:33 PM by Canada_EH
Originally posted by apex
I was thinking more like
this, but even so, it shouldn't cause total loss of power, and the chances of simultaneous bird strikes on two engines must be pretty low.


The chances are higher to have both engines fail then to have dual birdstrikes.

Also the comments on control of flight systems etc. I'm lead to believe that Airbus and possibly Boeing planes have a small wind turbine that will deploy if power is loss and the turbine runs the basic flight systems.


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 03:57 PM by Harlequin
uk.news.yahoo.com...

One eyewitness, Steve Bell, said the wheels were not down on landing, and he heard a grating noise.



systems failure on lowering undercarraige?



reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 04:17 PM by apex
Originally posted by Canada_EH
The chances are higher to have both engines fail then to have dual birdstrikes.

Is that simultaneous or sequential though?
Also the comments on control of flight systems etc. I'm lead to believe that Airbus and possibly Boeing planes have a small wind turbine that will deploy if power is loss and the turbine runs the basic flight systems.


You mean the Ram air turbine? It works fine in principle but its small and doesn't apparently generate all that much at landing speeds. The so called "
Gimli Glider" (an Air Canada flight that ran out of fuel) had difficulty on landing apparently:
The engines also supply power for the hydraulic systems, without which an aircraft the size of the 767 cannot be controlled. However, aircraft designs are required to accommodate such a failure, and a ram air turbine automatically deployed on the underbelly of the aircraft. In theory, the forward velocity of the aircraft would spin the ram air turbine, a propeller-driven generator, providing enough power for the hydraulics to make the aircraft controllable, although this proved problematic during landing.


But, if it's already at landing speed, the deployment of a ram air turbine probably can't do all that much.


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 04:24 PM by Harlequin
www.flightglobal.com...

The crew managed to control the descent to a touchdown with wings level, on grass just over the perimeter fence at Heathrow, on the 27L extended centreline. The gear was down, flaps were set at about 20°, and the indications are that the crew had started the auxiliary power unit.



cartridge start of the apu so they knew what had happened and had got the very last ditch back up running to bring the falling brick back down


kudos to the captain when the board is all red and the busses have been dumped


reply posted on 17-1-2008 @ 07:46 PM by stumason
reply to post by TheAvenger



Indeed!! An Indian work colleague of mine said had this been an airline such as India Air or Pakistan Airways, it would have plowed into the tarmac nose first. Apparently of all the airlines he's flown, with BA you hardly notice your landing.

even the passengers didn't even think they had crashed until the evacuation began, must have been that smooth a crash! I was once on a KLM flight from Heathrow to Schippol and it felt like the pilot really hated the tarmac when we got to Holland!


reply posted on 18-1-2008 @ 08:43 AM by Now_Then
reply to post by RichardPrice



That flight you mentioned would of had considerably more airspeed and a lot more height - a lot more options!! Still very skilled to put down safely.


reply posted on 18-1-2008 @ 08:50 AM by Canada_EH
reply to post by RichardPrice



Agreed as I had mentioned early with the RAT post and the mention the the azors landing as well.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 15 days ago with 4 member flags
F22 mishap or more that meeets the eye?
  Posted 4 days ago with 4 member flags
Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 8 days ago with 3 member flags
Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 17 days ago with 0 member flags